Radiation Exposure: TSA vs Airplane

[tongodeon]

One legitimate concern that people have about the new TSA groping requirements is the "mandatory irradiation". Millimeter wave scanners emit non-ionizing radiation, but back-scatter Xray machines emit more dangerous ionizing radiationBut back-scatter doesn't need to pass through the matter, so back-scatter doesn't emit very much. Xray standards

Comments

Therapeutic Stimulation Authority

[drjohn]

It's like getting a base tan before you go to the beach

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis

Re: Therapeutic Stimulation Authority

[talldean]

Except it's not usually good to base health decisions on something that has in the first paragraph:

"it is not yet known if radiation hormesis occurs outside the laboratory, or in humans."

Wikikikya

[drjohn]

Better reference, pretty graphs circa 1991:
http://books.google.com/books?id=FK7EayQN9dYC&lpg=PA8&ots=6KusSW97vh&dq=hormesis%20denver&pg=PA7#v=onepage&q=hormesis%20denver&f=false

Human experiences:
http://books.google.com/books?id=FK7EayQN9dYC&lpg=PA8&ots=6KusSW97vh&dq=hormesis%20denver&pg=PA101#v=onepage&q=hormesis%20denver&f=false

One of the quandries of radiation exposure is why people exposed to more cosmic rays (say, in Denver: page 9) do not have higher rates of cancer. Both the radiation and the cancer rates are observable; the schools of thought for why this is so vary.

Re: Therapeutic Stimulation Authority

[tongodeon]

But that's what people on the other side are doing. It's "not yet known" if back-scatter x-rays have any negative effect at all, and yet they're getting freaked out about "mandatory irradiation".

If you want to base your decision on what the best evidence currently indicates, there's no effect. If you want to base your decision on untested fringe theories it's a toss-up. It might actually be slightly beneficial, or it might be a slight risk.

ps; drjohn is a practicing radiologist, so he's speaking within his area of expertise.

Re: Therapeutic Stimulation Authority

[talldean]

Oh, I'm not arguing with you on this one; your viewpoint seems reasonable.

As far as drjohn, I agree with his viewpoint as well, just not with the presentation; it's still in the land of theory, unfortunately.

Re: Therapeutic Stimulation Authority

[ikkyu2]

ps; drjohn is a practicing radiologist, so he's speaking within his area of expertise.

I don't know what drjohn knows about these topics, but the average radiologist I've encountered knows far less about radiation injury than, for instance, I do; and I'm hardly an expert. Radiation oncologists know more; medical physicists and reactor/radiation safety officials are probably the guys who routinely have to know and be tested on this knowledge; and the small group of people who are epidemiologists charged with the investigation of outbreaks of radiation injury are the real experts.

Re: Therapeutic Stimulation Authority

[funranium]

**the small group of people who are epidemiologists charged with the investigation of outbreaks of radiation injury are the real experts**

And they are always looking for (but hoping not to find) a new cohort to set another datapoint for the next BEIR report. ;)